i mean, i do think it has to do with medical experts because most governments action is based on the assesment of those experts
To an extent. For example, Anthony Fauci has multiple accusations against him for unethical practices in regards to science. I can't recall them at the top of my head so here is a video:
Secondly, vaccine mandates, although against your human rights, are being forced upon in hospitals. Here's a video about that too. While the source is heavily in support of my general narrative, so there's obviously cherry picking and no nuance, I hope you can see past that and see the general message:
.. that it's more than likely governments in control of hospitals, even if hospitals have experts. I don't think hospital staff would refuse to operate on a baby just because their parents are unvaccinated (I hope).
i would say it's also because children can transmit the disease e.g. to their grandparents and the vaccine has the potential to prevent this.
I said in my previous posts that vaccinated people still spread the virus. Even if vaccinated people couldn't spread the virus, the flu affects everyone. So, logically, the flu is more of a danger to everyone whilst covid is just a danger to the elderly (on average).
i disagree. the concept of a vaccine is to protect people from diseases. protecting can mean many things that range from reducing transmission to reducing how severely ill people get. it's true, omicron is usually less severe and I agree you could say the south african government overreacted. I think it's just about being careful overall. it's better to overreact than to underestimate something and risk a lot of people dying
There's a vaccine against measles. The vaccine prevents you from getting measles. It doesn't reduce the symptoms. That's a cure, or medication. If you have measles, you aren't then given a vaccine. How a vaccine generally works is that it has a portion of the virus that is inactivate, and/or a small portion incapable of causing great harm. This is introduced into your body, so your white blood cells can create antibodies to detect the virus, and learn to eradicate them. Then, if the virus in fully-fledged form is introduced to your body again, your white blood cells are prepared and hence you eradicate the virus from your body. The reason this is needed is because it a virus is given to your body with no prior preparation, that's what results in you succumbing to the virus because you were unprepared. No, the South African government didn't overreact - the borders I was referring to was the neighbouring countries of South Africa, and the United States and other locations. The idea of "better safe than sorry" cannot apply here anymore, because the economic sector of many counties are terrible to the point where people may just die from homelessness, unemployment and therefore suicide. You can see it on this very same forum.
i mean, what would the government get out of "detaining" their citizens? it just makes the government unpopular & the economy is fucked because of covid restrictions. it's about preventing deaths. I don't get what you mean by your last sentence. Why would a rise in cases be due to government incompetency/negligence, I was under the impression that you thought the government shouldn't interfere and shouldn't impose covid restrictions? What should the government do in your opinion?
I personally don't think everything I say here is true, but I will say there's a lot of evidence out there pointing toward a narrative that we may not he able to see. The definition of the extreme right is Nazis, and white supremacists and xenophobes. I hope we can agree on that. History repeats itself over and over again, and many popular ideologies are often pushed to their extreme before some retaliation. Look at nazi Germany. Look at the cold War and socialism (we will be referring back to this soon). Look at Zimbabwe before they gained independence from Britain. My idea is that the popular narrative right now is the leftist ideology - not feminism, not the LTGBQ+, but the far left. Groups such as Antifa, or the extreme side of black lives matter, or in general, Marxists. 1984 by George Orwell, and general history into events where one idea ruled the population of a country, show that the limiting of speech limits thought. And the limiting of the free will of the people, and making them dependent on the government reduces the likelyhood of rebellion because rebels are likely to be shunned by their community and the government themselves. I'm not saying US government is heading in that direction, but the signs are in place - limiting free speech can be seen in "buzzwords" such as transphobe, abelist, fatphobe etcetera. Not because they were invented recently but because they're used to invalidate arguments without even needing to prove the accusation. You can call anyone racist, and instead of you proving it, they have to show that they are innocent. This is because people dare not ask the question "How was he racist?" because of reasons you can infer. While this sounds out of proportion, and it is because at most this is a problem that plagues Western society, its true. A great example would be about Kyle Rittenhouse, someone, in laymans terms, who shot and injured and/or killed three white criminals in self defence is deemed as a white supremacist, or was said to have killed black people, and no one can question that narrative. I would go into further detail but this post is getting too long. The other aspect, about citizen-government dependacy, I would like to explain with reference to nazi Germany. Germany at the time after the first World War were economically depressed, made even worse by the peace treaty signed forcing them in debt with the other nations, and reducing their military presence. Hitler rose to power because he promised a better economy for the Germans, while inserting his anti-human beliefs into politics. How this makes a connection to modern day America, is that the continuation of covid-19 will more than surely cripple the economy. There are already studies proving how America is on-par economically with the Great Depression (again, maybe an exaggeration). What the government can gain from this exploitation is near complete control over a population. I don't wish to compare the ideas given by hitler, and say those ideas are running today. I'm not against transpeople, nor am I a racist. I just want to demonstrate the patterns between different social structures in history. Will the government do as I said in this post? Maybe or maybe not. There are many variables that go into societies. These are just my ideas. The main take away I want from this post is for people to challenge the ideas fed to them. Very often, you are not in control. George Carlin, one of the greatest comedians of all time, would say something to the effect of "You're not in control. You're told how to think, what to do, how to act, what words to say, what words you can't say..." etcetera.
To finally answer your question, I believe that the initial response to covid-19 was justified, but governments internationally should have prepared more adequately for a national disaster of any kind. They should have listened to their medical experts begging for lock downs much sooner, and they should have. However, they shouldn't have lied about the effectiveness of the vaccines. They shouldn't have lied about the extended quarantine that people didn't need. They shouldn't have completely focused on the preservation of people's health of immediate concern, before the economy, because a broken economy will lead back to the threatening of the health of the people in more devastating ways. They should have scrutinised the pharmaceutical industry for creating ineffective vaccines initially. They should have redirected the unnecessary factions of resources given to covid-19 and other faculties, and instead to funded where the outbreak came from, and supporting the citizens of their own countries financially. They should have never made a vaccine or mask mandate to further divide tensions around the country. They should have never pushed a narrative that people skeptic of the government should be seen as idiots. They should have never devoted themselves to one political narrative. The government should have remained as a group of people elected by the people, for the people, instead of a group elected by a faction of people to serve only them. I don't want to entertain an argument like this any further because I fear this argument isn't productive, but here's a quote that I'm quite fond of:
"A government fearful of people is democracy. A people fearful of the government is tyranny".
Apologies for any spelling or grammatical mistakes. I did see your picture about the Swastika in the truckers protest, and I'm sorry. I genuinely did not see any, but my sources regarding that may have been incorrect.